W. Morris Taylor, P.C. v. Baird

Missouri Court of Appeals

W. Morris Taylor, P.C. v. Baird

895 S.W.2d 643, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 540, 1995 WL 128620

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 28, 1995·No. No. 65774·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Fran Baird appeals from an order denying her motion to set aside a default judgment. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. Although labeled a default judgment by the trial court, the judgment entered was not a default judgment. It was a judgment on the merits brought about by Appellant’s failure to appear for the scheduled trial de novo following a judgment in Respondent’s favor by the Associate Circuit Court. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We affirm in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Fran Baird appeals from an order denying her motion to set aside a default judgment. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. Although labeled a default judgment by the trial court, the judgment entered was not a default judgment. It was a judgment on the merits brought about by Appellant’s failure to appear for the scheduled trial de novo following a judgment in Respondent’s favor by the Associate Circuit Court. No error of law appears. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We affirm in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

W. Morris Taylor, P.C. v. Baird, 895 S.W.2d 643, 1995 Mo. App. LEXIS 540, 1995 WL 128620 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

895 S.W.2d 643 (W. Morris Taylor, P.C. v. Baird) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.